The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1887-11-10
DIR. wooDRow,s DEPOSITION

DIR. WOODROW'S DEPOSITION
From His Chair In the Theological Semi
nary Finally Confirmed by the Presbyte-
rfan Synod of South Carolina.
DARLINGTON, S. c., Nov.-The Pres
byterian Synod of South Carolina resum-
ed its business sessions last night after
an excellent sermon by Rev. ]. NJ. Rose.
Two reports we're presented by the Com.
mittee on the Records of the Theological
Seminary Board-.one from the majority
and one from the minority of the com:
mittee. The majority report approved
of the reopening of the Seminary. the
election of Rev. DR.. Hersman to the
Chair of Biblical Literature and Exege-
sis, and the election of DR.. Girardeau to
the Chair of Theology. Concerning DR.
WoQdrow's removal the majority reported
as follows:
Inasmuch as the Boards action in
removing the Rev. James Woodrow, D.
D., from the Perkins chair was in
accordance with the order of the four
controlling Synods, this Synod approves
of and confirms that action.
This record was signed by Messrs. Sum-
mey, Vardell and Stenhouse.
The minority report, offered by Messrs.
Bean and Randall, is as follows:
i. ResoEved, That this Synod disap.
proves of the manner in which the Board
of Directors has removed the Rev. James
Woodrow, D. D., from the Perkins pro-
fessorshin az unconstitutional,
2. Resolved, That the Board is hereby
instructed, the other controlling Synods
concurring, to proceed at once to deter
mine the question as to DIR. Woodrow's
alleged incompetence or unfaithtnlness
by full trial, as is provided in the Con.
stitution of the Seminary, Section 2,
Article II.
Rev. T. @. Ligon, of Anderson County,
moved the adoption of the majority
report.
Rev. N. lI. Woods, of Columbia, then
moved the substitution of the minority
report for so much of the other report as
refers to DR.. Woodrow's removal, and
supported his motion in a speech of one
hour. Mr.. Woods held that the question
of evolution was not before the Synod.
The only question was one of law,
namely, whether that Board had right
to degrade q professor from his chair,
suspected of doctrinal unsounduess, with.
out fair trial. The constitution guar
antees full trial, and that means a
judicial investigation, with specific
indictment giving times and places and
circumstances, witnesses to sustain the
charges, the presence of the accused,
with full opportunity to rebut testimony
and cross examine witnesses. The order
prescribed in the Seminary constitution
is: (D temporary suspension: ~ full
trial; (3) sentence; az confirmation by
the Synods. To depart from this order
and decapitate professor by the simple
resolve Of a Board chosen because it was
known beforehand that they would con-
denim the accused is to trample right
under foot and injure the church. If
DR.. Woodrow has taught any error or
violated his VOWS, let the offense be duly
set out in detail, and let him be dealt
with as he may justly deserve; but let
US avoid even the appearance of lynch
law in dealing with minister Of the
gospel. Even if the law seems ambigu'
GUS, as even DIR. Woodrow's enemies
confess it to be, then a fair regard for the
rules of discipline of our church ought to
have suggested that, unless the Seminary
law expressly forbade trial, DR.. Wood
row ought to have been allowed trial.
The rules of discipline give to the accused
persons the fullest and fairest chance to
show their innocence. If DR.. Woodrow
must be degraded, let it be after trial,
and not without trial.
DR.. Mack then spoke at length against
the minority report. He contended that
DIR. Woodrow has had judicial trial
before the Presbytery of Augusta. That
Presbytery acquitted him; but the Synod
of Georgia reversed that action, and
hence Dr.. Woodrow is condemned man
and his removal by the Board Was there.
fore after trial.
Mr.. Woods here asked DR.. Mack to
state whether DIR. Woodrow's trial had
been concluded, or was it still pending
in the General Assembly; and, also, if
DR.. Mack, while on the Board, did not
vote to remove DR.. Woodrow in 1884,
before his trial by the Presbytery had
begun.
Dr.. Mack promised to answer later.
This morning, DR.. Mack, having the
floor still, spoke again, declaring that
the orders of the four controlling Synods
last fall to the Board to remove DR..
Woodrow had to be obeyed by the Board,
and that this Synod could not censure
the Board for obeying the Syuods.
Each side was allowed one hour for
this discussion.
Rev. T. P. Whaling followed DR..
Mack in speech of great power, main
tanning that the Seminary constitution,
fairly interpreted, made trial necessary.
He showed that DR.. Woodrow's right
had been denied him, and that the forms
of law had been ignored by the Board.
Rev. Roger Martin spoke in opposition
to the minority report and Rev. w. J.
Mckay, Rev, J. l.. Wilson and Elder N.
J.-Holmes of Laureus, spoke in its favor.
DR.. Girardeau was the last speaker and
made an earnest speech against the mi.
nority report. He declared that the
Board, having been instructed to remove
DR.. Woodrow without trial, could only
obey, and that this Synod had no right
to censure the Board for its action.
When the vote was taken, the minori-
ity report was lost by a vote of GO to IS.
The majority report was then taken up
seriatim and adopted. DR.. Hersman's
election was approved without dissent.
ing voice.
Some voted against DR.. Girardeau's
confirmation because they said it was
wrong to place in the chief position in
the Seminary person who had taken
leading part in the controversy.
This probably ends DR.. Woodrow's
case in the Synod of South Carolina.
The debate was all good natured.
The Synod will finish its business to.
morrow.
AN OPEN LETTER.